Harry & Meghan 9: Pretending to Be Relevant

[Jackie3]

5 minutes ago, prayawaythefundie said:

I‘m not saying they are inherently different or should be handled differently. My question came from (self) observation that there are different levels of sensitivity that are influenced by the culture one was brought up with.

That makes perfect sense. I'm aware of such frailties in myself, especially as a young person.

5 minutes ago, prayawaythefundie said:

Just like I will never know from an insider‘s point of view what it is like to be  brought up in modern UK/US society that is concious on slavery & systemic racism towards POC, you will never know what it is like to be brought up in holocaust concious Germany.

I have many relatives who survived the Holocaust. Growing up, most of the adults around me had been survivors of Hitler's regime. I spent many long years in Hebrew School where that's all they talked about.  I don't know a survivor's experience exactly, of course. But I have a pretty good idea.

Edited June 22, 2022 by Jackie3

[prayawaythefundie]

4 minutes ago, Jackie3 said:

I have many relatives who survived the Holocaust. Growing up, most of the adults around me had been survivors of Hitler's regime. I spent many long years in Hebrew School where that's all they talked about.  I don't know a survivor's experience exactly, of course. But I have a pretty good idea.

Very different. My ancestors weren‘t victims or survivors, they were villains or enablers. That‘s what I grew up with.
 

That‘s actually a very good example for what I was saying: equalizing our points of view would be considered offensive by many Germans today but you were raised differently. So no blame, just informing. 

[prayawaythefundie]

1 hour ago, Jackie3 said:

Of course she did. I doubt we know about every micro aggression she encountered.

I wonder if she knows about Harry‘s past racist „missteps“. How does she deal with that? 

[tabitha2]

I have found Harry’s fans make excuses for his boorish racist behavior quite easily    

Someone years ago might or might not have said something about Archie’s appearance and the Royal  family are branded racists and full of micro aggressions against dear Meghan. 

Harry’s behavior was caught on camera and his slurs are well documented but he was young, he was drunk, he had a rough patch, Etc. But it’s all good now! 

Edited June 22, 2022 by tabitha2

[formergothardite]

5 hours ago, tabitha2 said:

I have found Harry’s fans make excuses for his boorish racist behavior quite easily    

Someone years ago might or might not have said something about Archie’s appearance and the Royal  family are branded racists and full of micro aggressions against dear Meghan. 

Harry’s behavior was caught on camera and his slurs are well documented but he was young, he was drunk, he had a rough patch, Etc. But it’s all good now! 

People change. When I was younger I once used a phrase that is so offensive that I’m fairly sure the words are banned from FJ. At that time I saw nothing wrong with it because people in my circle considered it normal. But even two years later I had changed that I wouldn’t have used it. Now I’m a totally different person than the person who said that. Accepting that people change isn’t making up excuses. He absolutely behaved in an awful way, but the Harry of today doesn’t appear to still be the Harry of that time period. 
 

And when looking at his behavior, we have to factor in that he was raised in a bubble of privilege where his father and the people in the club he was a member of thought it was innocent fun to use a racist nickname. He was being taught that was okay and not racist, when in reality it absolutely was racist.  His grandfather was well known for saying racist things in public. Rufus knows what horrible things he said in private around Harry and I bet few dared to ever call him out on it. A former black employee for the royal family said that racist comments were rampant in that household even among employees. So if you look at the environment Harry was raised in, is it truly shocking he thought racism was fine? His actions didn’t happen in a vacuum. 

Just like I would not like people to act like I’m the same person I was all those years ago, we shouldn’t act like Harry hasn’t changed. He’s still a spoiled, self absorbed prince who seems pretty oblivious to real life, but he doesn’t appear to be still deeply entrenched in racism like he was before. 

[prayawaythefundie]

27 minutes ago, formergothardite said:

Just like I would not like people to act like I’m the same person I was all those years ago, we shouldn’t act like Harry hasn’t changed.

I agree with that but it should apply to everyone then. If we are forgiving about the past / acknowledging change, Elizabeth can‘t be judged today for what ever she did or did not do to her former nanny decades ago, Charles can‘t be judged for mistakes in his marriage to Diana etc. No double standards.

Edited June 22, 2022 by prayawaythefundie

[formergothardite]

1 minute ago, prayawaythefundie said:

I agree with that but it should apply to everyone then. If we are forgiving about the past / acknowledging change Elizabeth can‘t be judged today for what ever she did or did not do to her former nanny decades ago, Charles can‘t be judged for mistakes in his marriage etc. No double standards.

Absolutely, if they have shown signs of no longer living in that mindset. My racist relative who was racist in the 80's and is still the same racist person, yeah, im not cutting him any slack because he hasn't changed. My relatives who went from racist and homophobic to embracing and supporting the POC who married into my family along with my gay cousin, absolutely we shouldn't act like they are the same people they were decades ago. So if the Queen and Charles are showing that they have changed and no longer believe the things they used to believe, then we should not act like they are the same people they were all those years ago. 

IMO Harry was raised in an extremely problematic environment, one he has every right to discuss. But he has gone about it all the wrong way. Probably because he is an Alyssa Bates level superficial twit and appears to be ridiculously entitled. He wants to be the super special son who gets to live his own life getting all sorts of attention for being "different" all while still wanting royal perks. Reality seems to be hitting him pretty hard. He is going to flounder about being useless and whining constantly about not getting what he wants. 

[prayawaythefundie]

36 minutes ago, formergothardite said:

So if the Queen and Charles are showing that they have changed and no longer believe the things they used to believe, then we should not act like they are the same people they were all those years ago. 

True. I think we are giving Harry the benefit of the doubt though. I don‘t think he has publicly admitted any mistakes.

Edited June 22, 2022 by prayawaythefundie

[tabitha2]

Silly rabbit! Harry doesn’t make mistakes! If things go wrong for him it’s his family’s fault or the presses fault or the palace staffs fault  and on and  on…

[Coconut Flan]

Reminder time:

[formergothardite]

1 hour ago, prayawaythefundie said:

True. I think we are giving Harry the benefit of the doubt though. I don‘t think he has publicly admitted any mistakes.

Oh I don’t think he made a mistake. A mistake is forgetting someone’s name. He behaved in horrifically racist ways. Harry made an active decision to do awful things. The behavior was probably fueled by living in a privileged, racist bubble, but he made the choice. He didn’t trip and fall into a Nazi costume. 

 He has given a speech where he addressed unconscious bias, said he is sorry his generation has not done enough to tackle racism and that he is committed to helping change the culture of racism. That and the fact that he married a black woman and now has mixed race children shows, at least to me,  that he is making strides. He is absolutely still a spoiled entitled prince who whines entirely too much, but he doesn’t seem like he would call people racial slurs anymore. 

He absolutely should address his past racism, just like Charles should come out and admit giving a black person a racist nickname isn’t harmless fun like he once claimed. It would do all these people some good if they were just honest about the long standing  culture of racism in the royal family. But they tend to be extremely privileged people and I bet none of them want to admit that THEY have been a part of the problem. It is easier to make impersonal statements condemning racism than do the hard work of looking inward and addressing in public their own past racist actions.I will be shocked if any of them publicly address past racist behavior. 

[LilaMae]

1 hour ago, formergothardite said:

 He has given a speech where he addressed unconscious bias, said he is sorry his generation has not done enough to tackle racism and that he is committed to helping change the culture of racism. That and the fact that he married a black woman and now has mixed race children shows, at least to me,  that he is making strides. He is absolutely still a spoiled entitled prince who whines entirely too much, but he doesn’t seem like he would call people racial slurs anymore. 

 

I disagree that Harry being the father of two mixed race children necessarily means that he is making strides against racism. There are lots of white parents of mixed race children who engage in microaggressions like refusing to learn how to care for their daughters' hair or refusing to believe that their children may experience racism. How many times have fundies adopted black children and then proclaimed that "they don't see colour" to the detriment of their kids? Harry might have stood up and made pronouncements about "his generation" but to my knowledge he has never apologised for the numerous actions of his own that most people would consider racist. Marrying a mixed race woman doesn't erase all that and doesn't qualify him to be an expert. 

 

[tabitha2]

2 hours ago, Coconut Flan said:

Reminder time:

 This troll is a persistent and particularly bitter one as well. I suppose she gets cranky from staying up to late ouija boarding  St Crawford or something. 

[DalmatianCat]

1 hour ago, formergothardite said:

That and the fact that he married a black woman and now has mixed race children shows, at least to me,  that he is making strides. He is absolutely still a spoiled entitled prince who whines entirely too much, but he doesn’t seem like he would call people racial slurs anymore.

I’m open to correction on this and willing to learn, but isn’t it more correct to refer to Meghan as mixed race (or biracial) as well as her children?

[Coconut Flan]

2 minutes ago, DalmatianCat said:

I’m open to correction on this and willing to learn, but isn’t it more correct to refer to Meghan as mixed race (or biracial) as well as her children?

Indeed it is and how Meghan referred to herself for at least 36 or so years.  She has repeatedly in the past made it a point that she could not deny either part of her heritage. 

[tabitha2]

I called her bi racial here before and got called a huge racist which makes no sense esp As she identifies as herself as mixed race not black or white. 

 

 

 

[louisa05]

On 6/21/2022 at 4:58 AM, tabitha2 said:

Duh.They were “mean” to a governess 90 years ago… even gave her a house without curtains These tyrannical brutes are capable of anything!   Next she will be saying they are teaching George to throw darts at the haggard oppressed staff in  dungeons of the hundreds of grand castles they own. 

Wait, George isn’t practicing throwing darts at the staff in his own personal castle? Are you sure? Because I read that’s what all royal children do in place of schooling. 

[EmCatlyn]

18 hours ago, anjulibai said:

Prince Michael of Kent's wife felt comfortable enough to wear a blackamore broach to a party where Meghan was being introduced to the wider family at the tme. 

Even if Princess Michael is on the extreme end of racist sentiment within the Royal family, that she was that comfortable says lot about how racism is tolerated within the Royal Family.

In my experience, white people will perform racist microagressions that other white people either refuse to recognize or they just make excuses about, and I can easily see that happening in the Royal family. Hell, excuses were made for Princess Michael. 

We're aware of some of the overt racist crap Meghan dealt with, both from the press and from the some members of the Royal Family, there does not seem a doubt to me that she dealt with a lot of other shit that's not been mentioned. 

I don’t see wearing the “blackamoor brooch” as micro-aggression.  I see it as insensitivity.  It doesn’t make it ok, but the distinction for me lies in the intent. I don’t think Princess Michael of Kent wore the brooch as a gesture aimed at Meghan or anyone else.  I think she wore it without thinking of what was depicted and how it would impact others. Yes, it was racism (and elitism) that made her insensitive.  And I agree that Meghan had a right to be bothered by it. I just don’t think that it was directed at Meghan.

A lot of times, people who are racist, sexist, classist, or whatever-ist do or say things that are offensive not out of a conscious “micro-aggression”  but out of sheer inability to think about how they might offend.  Unless we see anything that offends as “micro-aggression,” we need to differentiate between insensitivity and acts which are meant to offend.

As I have said before, I agree that there is plenty of racism among the elite in the UK, and I am aware that Buckingham Palace has a less than stellar record when it comes to diversity.  The question when it comes to Meghan, however, was not whether there was observable racism “around” (which no one can deny) but whether there was racism directed against Meghan.

The distinction matters because Meghan has argued that she was isolated and given less than her due because of her race.  Yet she has not really come up with a specific example of this being the case. (Archie was not made a prince because he is the great-grandchild of the monarch, not because his mother is biracial.  If the future plan is for only the grandchildren in the immediate line of descent to be princes, this plan was not made because of Meghan’s race.)

Meghan had every right to feel uncomfortable in the midst of a lot of “unconscious” racism and insensitive attitudes among the Palace staff and some members of the RF.  But surely she had experienced this sort of thing before.  It can’t have been unique to her experience in England.

The press was (from what I hear) brutal, and any racist remarks or jokes must have been very painful.  Yet Meghan’s perception that she was less protected from attacks by the press than other royals seems to be inaccurate.

In short, the impression many of us get is that Meghan may be blaming things that “the Firm” did or didn’t do on “racism” when they may have had other causes.  This does not mean there wasn’t racism, only that she has not given any specific, credible examples of how “racism” manifested in how she was not treated well (her assertion) by the RF.

My impression, frankly, was the opposite.  I think the RF welcomed her as representing the new progressive image of the RF.  As a public relations thing, a bi-racial member of the RF was a great thing, and her race was seen as a plus, not a minus. (Granted that tokenism is another manifestation of racism, the subject here is whether she was treated “worse” than, say, Kate, because she was not 100% “white.” And I don’t think she was.)

On the whole, Meghan had good reasons to be uncomfortable and unhappy.  Some of the discomfort may have come from a racist atmosphere, but we have no specifics to discuss beyond what I’ve mentioned above.  Given that there are other reasons that Meghan may not have fit in, I think we should not fixate on the racism.

To repeat: the issue for me is not that Meghan and Harry chose to leave the RF but that they left in a way that seemed designed to paint themselves as victims and to throw shade on Harry’s family.  I can understand the leaving.  I do not understand the way they left.

[viii]

2 hours ago, EmCatlyn said:

 Given that there are other reasons that Meghan may not have fit in, I think we should not fixate on the racism.

You lost me here. It’s easy to say as a white person that we shouldn’t focus on the racism. 

[Jackie3]

6 hours ago, EmCatlyn said:

I don’t see wearing the “blackamoor brooch” as micro-aggression.  I see it as insensitivity.  It doesn’t make it ok, but the distinction for me lies in the intent. 

Princess Michael of Kent named her two black sheep "Venus" and "Serena" after the tennis players. 

She told some black diners at a restaurant to "go back to the colonies."  

This is someone you want to defend? You think these comments are just "insensitivity"?  I'm not a fan of normalizing racism by calling it insensitivity.

6 hours ago, EmCatlyn said:

Given that there are other reasons that Meghan may not have fit in, I think we should not fixate on the racism.

"Fixate" on it? It's hardly been discussed at all. I'd say the "fixation" has been more on royal clothing and children. I guess a brief discussion becomes a "fixation" when the topic is an unpleasant one.

 I'm sorry if discussing racism inconveniences you or disturbs your fragility. 

The Royals are more than just cute pictures of dressed up little princesses.

6 hours ago, EmCatlyn said:

In short, the impression many of us get is that Meghan may be blaming things that “the Firm” did or didn’t do on “racism” when they may have had other causes.  

You don't need to put racism in quotes. It's real. 

This reminds me of when a fundie was describing marital rape, but she called it marital "rape."

Edited June 23, 2022 by Jackie3

[EmCatlyn]

1 hour ago, Jackie3 said:

Princess Michael of Kent named her two black sheep "Venus" and "Serena" after the tennis players. 

She told some black diners at a restaurant to "go back to the colonies."  

This is someone you want to defend? You think these comments are just "insensitivity"?  I'm not a fan of normalizing racism by calling it insensitivity.

I have no interest in defending Princess Michael of Kent.  I do not know anything about the woman other than what someone here was saying about the “blackamoor brooch,”   I agree that her naming of sheep and what you report she said to black diners suggests racism.  I was not denying that the woman may be a racist.  I was arguing that wearing the brooch may not have been an act of racism against Meghan.  
 

1 hour ago, Jackie3 said:

"Fixate" on it? It's hardly been discussed at all. I'd say the "fixation" has been more on royal clothing and children. I guess a brief discussion becomes a "fixation" when the topic is an unpleasant one.

 I'm sorry if discussing racism inconveniences you or disturbs your fragility. 

The Royals are more than just cute pictures of dressed up little princesses.

Oh please!  I never have anything to say about royal fashion and I have less interest in cute royal kids than I have in “cute kids” in general.

The reason I said we shouldn’t fixate on the allegations of “racism” made by Meghan is that (as several of us have pointed out) there is not much to discuss.  We have no specifics to examine or analyze. It takes away from discussion of things about we have more detail.

I am interested in people and what makes them tick.  Every time someone brings up “the racism Meghan experienced” without specifics we go into a blurry haze that adds nothing to our understanding of Meghan or the people around her.  If someone has specific examples of instances where the royals behaved in racist ways towards Meghan, then by all means, we should discuss. That is interesting and illuminating.  (As was your information about the sheep.)  But the umpteenth mention of, “But Meghan had to deal with racism too,” is not going to lead to anything new. So, we acknowledge racism is a problem in the RF, but there is not much else to say. And so, if anyone wants to keep talking about it (with no new angles or facts) it would be a bit obsessive in my view.

2 hours ago, Jackie3 said:

You don't need to put racism in quotes. It's real. 

If you look at how I generally use quotes in my posts, I tend to put things in quotation marks when I am attributing the word(s) or concept to someone else.  I never use quotes to suggest something isn’t “real.”

I have used “racism” in quotes when  someone else has said or suggested that something is racism, but it has not been clear to me that what is going on is “racism” or something else: example, Meghan’s suggestion that race had something to do with why Archie couldn’t be a prince.

In contrast,  when I am saying that something is racism, I don’t use quotes. In fact, I started one of my recent posts saying that racism (no quotes) in the Royal Family is real.  You may have missed that.

Look, I believe the RF is elitist and that part of their elitism includes insensitivity to class, gender and race issues.  Some of them (Princess Michael, certainly) are racists.  What I am not always sure is that Meghan’s claim that this or that happened or was done to her because of her race is justified. I agree that racism creates an unpleasant atmosphere and that this was a problem for Meghan. I also agree that the press was racist in some (but not all) of their attacks on Meghan.  Where I question claims of “racism” from Meghan is when the accusation is vague and there is evidence that other interpretations might be possible. (Example: maybe she is accused of “bullying” not because of “racism” but because by many accounts she was demanding and rubbed some people the wrong way.)  

Many “defenders of Meghan” do become fixated on how everything that went wrong had to do with her race. I think there were other factors, and lacking more specifics about the racism she encountered, I am more interested in the personality and cultural issues (about which we have more information.

[EmCatlyn]

5 hours ago, viii said:

You lost me here. It’s easy to say as a white person that we shouldn’t focus on the racism. 

You left out part of what I said. 

Quote

On the whole, Meghan had good reasons to be uncomfortable and unhappy.  Some of the discomfort may have come from a racist atmosphere, but we have no specifics to discuss beyond what I’ve mentioned above.  Given that there are other reasons that Meghan may not have fit in, I think we should not fixate on the racism.

My post identified several reasons including racism that would account for Meghan not fitting in.. I suggested we might look at some of the other reasons because we don’t have clear examples of racism directed at Megan. I would say the same about not having clear examples of sexism, and I am a woman.

[zee_four]

On 6/2/2022 at 3:24 AM, Coconut Flan said:

Oh good grief.  The pre-schools my grandkids attended had either key card locks or key pad locks on the doors or gates and regular security patrols.  

I'm trying to be charitable and assume when people say dumb things like that they're talking about their kids schools 20-30 years ago minimum. After Columbine most schools started keeping most doors locked during the day at the very least, rich, poor, private, public. That was over 20 years ago.the changes since Sandy Hook 10 years ago were ever more comprehensive when the idea school violence was primarily a teenage/middle and high school problem was shown to be false. Since Parkland in 2018 and the rampant number of massive school shootings of all ages in the almost 5 years since the security measures are no freaking joke.

But I have no excuse for the type of stupidity that thinks just because their children's school decades ago was a certain way that means they're right about contemporary private schools. 

I mean yeah I remember going into the cockpit on commercial flights as a child but I'm not going to use that as an example for why I'm right about cockpits not being locked today because I was a child years before 9/11.

I know everyone says this is a troll but sometimes I think its a real but dumb person (with some other character flaws).

[viii]

9 hours ago, EmCatlyn said:

You left out part of what I said. 

We will have to agree to disagree because I don't think it matters if we have clear examples or not. We know for a 100% fact that Meghan suffered from racist attacks, within the BRF and from the media, and that's good enough for me. As a white person, it is NOT my place to downplay what she experienced, no matter how insufferable she has become. 

[louisa05]

10 minutes ago, viii said:

We will have to agree to disagree because I don't think it matters if we have clear examples or not. We know for a 100% fact that Meghan suffered from racist attacks, within the BRF and from the media, and that's good enough for me. As a white person, it is NOT my place to downplay what she experienced, no matter how insufferable she has become. 

We don't know that 100% in regard to the family. We know what she said. But she lied about almost everything else in the interview when she told us.